Transparent, High Integrity, Open Source Elections

I like this much better than Chaum's previous proposals. Relatively speaking its actually quite simple. You could really deploy this.

This is very similar to a proposal that I made on this website back in 2003.

The cool aspect is that you go home with a receipt. You can log into a website and verify that your vote was logged correctly, and you can download the complete election results and count them yourself with your own software, so you don't have to trust someone else to count them correctly.

Furthermore, you cannot prove to anyone else that you voted for a particular candidate, which makes it impossible for anyone to influence your vote. The candidates need to perform some random auditing to verify that the votes have been applied to the correct candidates, so you have to trust that the candidates:

1. Aren't colluding to throw the election.
2. Haven't screwed up their audits.
3. Haven't been fooled by some sleight of hand on the part of the system operators.

However, I think these are acceptable risks, at least in the west. The existance of all of these things creates, I think, and effective deterrent against fraud in the counting process, particularly with electronic machines. Its also a hell of a lot cheaper and more accurate than the paper audit trail "high school gym full of old ladies" counting process that many voting advocates seem enamored with.

The other issue, which I cover in my proposal, is that the count of registered voters needs to sync with the count of votes cast, and the people voting need to be alive, etc... To be honest, I think thats likely a much larger source of fraud than then actual counting process...

On slashdot people are calling this snake oil. That community is really getting worthless as a litmus of what real technical people think. Unfortunately, I worry that if they don't get it, the general population won't get it either... I think this could actually get a better recpetion in practice than it has had on Slashdot, but you'd really need communities like that to get behind doing the auditing... Its a shame they couldn't be bothered to read the things they are commenting on.

Punchscan.org

It used to be that Democrats won all races for statewide office. This year, it's possible that they could all go Republican. The truth is that there are qualified candidates in both parties, depending on the contest.

Creative Loafing's election guide. News weeklies are typically left of center, but I have to agree with bipartisan disgust exhibited by this guide.

Creative Loafing - Creative Loafing Atlanta: Cover: Cover Story: Statewide races

Maria Douglas teaches at a community college and has a daughter in high school, so she's keenly interested in this year's race for state school superintendent.

Unfortunately for Douglas, a DeKalb County resident, none of the candidates impresses her much.

I agree.

Voters size up candidates for superintendent | ajc.com

This guide includes information about candidates in contested races and ballot measures in the Nov. 7 general election.

Tired of clicking around to find this. Still not sure if I'm going to use it.

Voters Guide

Lies on the left.

"Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush.” In his delivery, he dropped the word “us.”

Lies on the right.

Nancy Pelosi has opposed having international phone calls to and from terrorists monitored by American intelligence agencies.

I usually put a lot of effort into voting. There are 30+ seats on the ballot here. I was planning on spending a few hours this weekend looking at all of the candidates for each seat and writing down my choices... I think there is a very very small percentage of the population who actually do this.

I have to say, I'm so fucking sick of the bullshit that is streaming out of the right wing spin machine that I'm thinking of showing up and voting a straight democratic ticket. I know its not really smart. But I've had it.

I want the level of the debate raised.

BUSH: The Democrats just follow a simple philosophy.

Just say no.

When it comes to listening to the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

It's just say no.

When it comes to detaining terrorists, what is the Democrats' answer?

Just say no.

When it comes to questioning terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

AUDIENCE: Just say no.

BUSH: When it comes to trying the terrorists, what's the Democrats' answer?

AUDIENCE: Just say no.

BUSH: So when the Democrats ask your for vote, what's your answer?

AUDIENCE: No!

Mr. Bush's own lawyers argued "just say no" on the matter of trying terrorists, preferring instead hold them forever without trial:

There is no obligation under the laws and customs of war for the military to charge captured combatants with any offense and, indeed, the vast majority of combatants seized during war are detained as a simple war measure without charges. Similarly, there is no general right to counsel under the laws and customs of war
for those who are detained as enemy combatants.

John Kerry has been getting tarred and featherd for 24 hours because of a misinterpretation of something he said. He didn't mean it, but half the country is mad as hell about it anyway.

As someone who cares about the system of checks and balances, civil liberties, and the rule of law, I agree with Democrats who've argued that the President should follow FISA. I don't think the President should be able to apprehend someone in an airport in Chicago and call it a "battlefield detention." I don't think the President should be able to detain people, citizens in particular, indefinately, without charges. I think these things strike at the very heart of the fundamental underpinnings of our system of government and I am mad as hell about it.

Am I misinterpreting the above remarks when I conclude that the President thinks I'm opposed to combating terrorism because of my concerns? No. I'm not. He means it.

Why is it OK to tar and feather one man for something he didn't say, but no one would raise a finger to question another man for something he did say. THIS is offensive! Why isn't anyone, anywhere, expressing any anger about this?

Media Matters - Media uncritically reported Bush's false claim

One of the more corrupt pundit phenomena is the way in which the most loyal and worshipful Bush followers, who spent the last five years praising the President and doing everything possible to enable his most radical policies, are now suddenly pretending to be so deeply dissatisfied with his rule. Now that the Bush movement is collapsing, they all want to pretend that they knew all along that things weren't going well and that the President was deeply flawed.

There is not one damn thing that is new about Iraq. Nothing about 2003 has changed recently. If you are now unhappy about what we did in 2003 you should have been unhappy about it 2 years ago. In fact, if you'd bothered to be unhappy about it two years ago you could have actually fired the people responsible for it instead of punishing a bunch of other people who had much less to do with it, but happen to have the misfortune of playing for the same team.

Occam's razor suggests that the people of this country just aren't down with the Republicans in the wake of Katrina, and the conservative pundit class is trying to save itself while diverting attention from that issue. I hope thats the answer.

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Peggy Noonan and the rotting pundit class

Oh, those Tennesseans!

“Canada can take care of North Korea,” a grandfatherly farmer says. “They’re not busy.” And a sleazy looking fellow scoffs: “So he took money from porn movie producers. Who hasn’t?”

Why are we making electoral decisions based on this sort of tripe? This isn't democracy. This is the cola wars. If we're really interesting in undermining the influence of campaign finance dollars we have to give the people better information resources than ads like these.

Scary, Like Funny Scary

"The Bush Administration must immediately act to investigate, apprehend those responsible, shut down the website, and warn airlines and aviation security officials to be on the look-out for fraudsters or terrorists trying to use fake boarding passes in an attempt to cheat their way through security and onto a plane."

Shoot the messenger! Shoot the messenger! For the love of god won't somebody PLEASE shoot that messenger!?

The dumbest words that have ever come out of Ed Markey's mouth: